Hitchens brothersAll my life I have tried desperately to be clever and taken seriously. But much to my own social demise, I am also a bit silly at times and can often fool my far more intellectual counterparts, that enjoy nothing more than to correct my Terr’s and Ferr’s, instantly, to think that I am one of those fellas that enjoys nothing more, than my own good arrogant opinion. They of course couldn’t be more wrong; as debate is something that I both love and despise. More often than not, we have two extremely arrogant in their opinions, doing battle, both fast to refer at the other as a bigot for not seeing their side of the story, and thus with sweet hidden irony are in fact bigots themselves. And this ladies and gentleman, is never more present than that of the debate of an agnostic vs atheist.

The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic. Charles Darwin

giant spaghetti monsterMuch to the highly enjoyable ignorance of atheists, Charles Darwin was agnostic. When you look at the debate of agnostic vs atheist from a completely non basis but logical standpoint, you begin to instantly notice cracks. Now, these cracks are in fact formed on both sides. On one side we have the agnostic; humbly they stand on the fence, they don’t accept that god exists nor do they allow for themselves to realise that he definitely doesn’t. This standpoint for an atheist, is altogether infuriating; because surely if their is no evidence than how can a god exist? Or even a giant spaghetti monster? I firm favorite of Richard Dawkins. However, the agnostic is also furious at the atheists; how can you so arrogantly with all but your five senses believe to understand that a creator definitely doesn’t exist? Without doubt, the agnostic vs atheist debate is a challenging one, nevertheless It does have a surprising solution.

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

One of our civilizations biggest problems is that we don’t accept the fact that we are all different. within our own heads each of us is subjectively experiencing their own reality. Another mans god is another mans spaghetti monster etc. Some people find that its important to believe in a god because they were raised to believe so, and others were cast to a life where there was clearly no such evidence of a god and thus find these other people odd in the fact that they think some divine power is looking over them. One thing is certain, my universe where I live and breath and experience is completely different to Richard Dawkins. Our minds although are both human, his is for whatever reason different to mine and thus is able to look at a larger picture and be confidant with the applicability of the human mind. Myself due to my own experiences and my romantic nature cant accept a world of definition. To believe that the universe came from nothing yet is governed by laws, and that forces as complex as time, mathematics and psychics came from nothing, and were instantly there, without an evolutionary process of their own, to me is incredible; how can something as complex as time, just show up? The answer is beyond science, and ironically I myself am bigoted for thinking so. Thus we should all just accept that we don’t know, and simply get naked, move to Hawaii, dance and fuck, wearing ridiculously large grins and drinking cocktails.